Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Raleigh builder Steve Sypher is suing Neal, 61, over her property’s restrictive covenant. ... The city would like to see more dense housing options along BRT lines. In June, the city approved ...
Every county recorder in California will establish a program to identify and redact unlawfully restrictive covenants from the state’s real The post California law requiring removal of racial ...
Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court case that held that racially restrictive housing covenants cannot legally be enforced.. The case arose after an African-American family purchased a house in St. Louis that was subject to a restrictive covenant preventing "people of the Negro or Mongolian Race" from occupying the property.
This builds on earlier legislation that allowed homeowners to request the removal of such language. [57] Washington: The state passed a law in 2021 that requires all real estate documents to be free from racially restrictive covenants and provides a process for property owners to have them removed. [58]
Rejecting that argument, the Illinois state court held that the covenant was enforceable. [1] Years later, a homeowner who had signed the restrictive covenant sold his home to Carl Augustus Hansberry, the father of Lorraine Hansberry. Anna M. Lee, a homeowner, sought to enforce the racially restrictive covenant and void the sale.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
Davidson Bros., Inc. v. D. Katz & Sons, Inc., 643 A.2d 642 (App. Div. 1994), was a case decided by the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey that first applied public policy considerations instead of the touch and concern doctrine when deciding the validity of a restrictive covenant.
An action to enforce townhome covenants is, in fact, a legal or equitable action on a contract or written instrument—and so any enforcement action must be brought within five years.